SCOTUS upholds Texas congressional map for 2026

Supreme Court Affirms Texas Congressional Map, Ending Challenge Over Minority Voting Power

WASHINGTON D.C. – The U.S. Supreme Court on December 4, 2024, gave Texas the green light to use its current congressional district map for the 2026 elections, rejecting a challenge that claimed the boundaries diluted the voting power of Hispanic and Black residents. This decision means the controversial 2021 map, drawn by the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature, will remain in place, preserving the political landscape for the state’s 38 congressional seats for the foreseeable future.

The high court’s decision was a brief, one-sentence order denying the appeal without comment, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson being the lone dissenter. This outcome effectively brings to an end a significant legal battle that has raged since the map’s inception.

The lawsuit was brought by prominent civil rights groups, including the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and the Texas State Conference of the NAACP, along with individual voters. They argued that the 2021 map, which created two new districts after the 2020 Census showed significant population growth primarily among Hispanic residents, failed to create new opportunities for minority voters. Instead, plaintiffs contended it packed Hispanic and Black voters into existing districts or split them among others, effectively limiting their ability to elect their preferred candidates in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Secretary of State Jane Nelson represented the state, maintaining that the map was legally drawn and did not discriminate unlawfully. Their defense emphasized that the legislature adhered to traditional redistricting principles.

This Supreme Court ruling upholds a previous decision from a three-judge panel in October 2023, which also found no evidence that the map unlawfully discriminated against Hispanic voters. That panel included U.S. Circuit Judges Stuart Kyle Duncan and James Ho, along with U.S. District Judge David Counts.

The challenge was particularly salient given Texas’s dramatic demographic shifts. The state’s population grew by nearly 4 million people between 2010 and 2020, with over half of that growth attributed to the Hispanic community. Advocates for the plaintiffs argued that the new district lines failed to reflect this growth fairly in political representation.

“This decision is a profound disappointment and a blow to the voting rights of millions of Texans,” said Domingo Garcia, National President of LULAC, in a statement following the ruling. “The Supreme Court has chosen to ignore clear evidence that the Republican-drawn map intentionally dilutes the power of Hispanic and Black voters, who are the drivers of our state’s growth. We will continue to fight for fair representation in Texas and across the country.”

Conversely, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton lauded the Supreme Court’s decision. “Today’s ruling is a significant victory for the rule of law and for the people of Texas,” Paxton stated. “We have consistently maintained that our maps were drawn lawfully and fairly, and we are pleased the Supreme Court has upheld the integrity of our redistricting process.”

For now, the legal battle over these congressional district lines is over, with the existing map set to define the electoral playing field in Texas. This outcome solidifies the current political reality where Republicans hold a 25-13 majority in the state’s congressional delegation, a dynamic largely maintained since the 2022 elections under this very map.

Political analysts suggest the ruling could have long-term implications for minority representation and the balance of power in Texas. “This ruling effectively locks in the current Republican majority for at least the next two election cycles,” noted Dr. Sharon Roberts, a political science professor at the University of Texas at Austin. “It signals a judiciary increasingly deferential to state legislatures in redistricting disputes, even amidst significant demographic shifts that would typically warrant a re-evaluation of district lines to ensure equitable representation.”